Chris McDonough wrote:
- Institute a policy that all distributions that are released to the
cheeseshop should be installable via "easy_install". IMO, if they
are not installable this way, they should not be released to the
cheeseshop, given the larger Python community's expectations.
- Figure out why buildout can (apparently) qsuccesfully install
dependencies of currently failing zope.* eggs while easy_install
can't. I probably won't be able to do this.
Because most buildouts specifically point to download.zope.org using
find-links (so that way the necessary egg that's missing from PyPI is
found), or they pin down the version of zope.traversing.
- Ditch the idea of releasing separate distributions for each
package in zope.app.
The individual eggs typically can't be used
outside of a zope appserver installation (and if they can, they
probably shouldn't be in "zope.app", they should be in "zope" or
they should be their own top-level package), and the
"namespaciness" of zope.app is suspect when it's unlikely that
anyone who is not a Zope committer will release a distribution
which makes use of that namespace package. Their current
overgranularity makes distributing them as separate eggs and
releasing them to the cheeseshop a form of "cheeseshop pollution",
especially given that so few of them can actually currently be
installed using easy_install or "setup.py install". If cheeseshop
is going to continue to be used as the index, I'd suggest creating
a zope.app top-level svn module with a single setup.py in
containing all the packages that are meant to go into zope.app.
Version the resulting "zope.app" distribution as necessary instead
of versioning many more granular "zope.app.*" distros. It's OK if
some people don't use some of the functionality in the resulting
egg, just toss everything in.
We can (and should) do that... almost :). For ages, the zope.app package
has been treated as a namespace package because it always contained
stuff that was releasable and stuff that wasn't (e.g.
zope.app.homefolder or zope.app.css were experiments that probably
shouldn't have been committed there in the first place, but alas, it
I don't think we should start releasing stuff that isn't in a releasable
There is precedent here in the
Paste distribution. It has many submodules and does many things,
but it comes in the form of a single egg.
Except that PasteScript and PasteDeploy are separate, which is just
weird, especially considering the awkward naming of the eggs...
Yes, you lose the
ability to make a bugfix in one subpackage and release it, but
IIRC the intent is to trim zope.app down anyway, pushing
libraryish things out to top-level or zope.* packages.
That *was* the plan at least. We moved several packages in the Zope 3.2
-> 3.3 upgrade, but a lot of people complained, so we pretty much
stopped doing that. Except when recently the Python parts of
zope.app.securitypolicy, zope.app.session were moved to
zope.securitypolicy, zope.session in an attempt to be able to reuse the
Python stuff without getting the browser views.
- Who's in charge? Whomever you might be, to what extent do you
agree/disagree with the above suggestions? If you agree with any,
how can I help fix things?
- I'm unsure how anybody is able to install Zope 3 right now using
eggs, unless there's some fundamental difference in the way
easy_install resolves dependencies vs. buildout. I have not looked
at how Stephan's KGS works yet, though, so I'm sure I'm just
missing some magic.
- We should consider fixing setuptools install to detect conflicts
before attempting to install anything.
The current regime of "find
conflicts halfway through an install" is IMO untenable in the long
term for using eggs as a distribution mechanism. This may mean a
very invasive change to both the package index and the client
Yup. The problem is that people run custom indexes locally so setuptools
would have to be able to deal with different kinds of index implementations.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -